Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
against the address of the accused, i.e. against word 'Regency
Park'. He denied the suggestion that the request for issuance of
processes, i.e. NBWs, Process u/s Section 82 and 83 of Cr.PC
were issued on incomplete/ wrong address hence the same was
not within the knowledge of accused Surender Sood. PW-5
admitted that in his statement which is Ex. PW-5/C, the address
of the accused was mentioned as OY-118, Regency Park, DLF-
IV, Gurgaon, Haryana, whereas the process i.e. NBWs and
process u/s 82 of Cr.PC were issued at address Y-118, Regency
Park, DLF-IV, Gurgaon, Haryana. However he stated that the
same was a clerical mistake, which he did not notice in his
statement although he had signed on his statement at point A
after reading the same. PW-5 admitted that he had got published
the proceedings u/s 82 of Cr.PC against the accused on
06.07.2007 in two newspapers, i.e. one Hindi newspaper
Digitally
signed by
NABEELA
NABEELA WALI
WALI Date:
2024.07.04
18:07:35
+0530
certified copy of request to issue process under section 83
Cr.P.C. which is Ex.PW6/G, certified copy of request to extend
time for execution of process u/s. 83 Cr.P.C. as Ex.PW6/H,
certified copy of process under section 83 Cr.P.C. running in
two pages as Ex.PW6/J, certified copy of request to declare
accused Surender Sood as proclaimed offender running into two
pages as Ex.PW6/K and the statement of Sunita Sood and
Sangita Anand as Ex.PW6/L and Ex.PW6/M respectively. PW-6
correctly identified the accused before the court.
EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED U/S 313 CRPC
13. Thereafter, statement of accused Surender Sood u/s 313 CrPC
was recorded wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to
the accused distinctly, separately and specifically. Accused
stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
the present case at the behest of complainant Rajender Singh in
FIR no. 829/2006, PS Crime Branch in collusion with the police
in order to blackmail, harass and extort money from him. He
stated that no summons/warrants/process under section 82/83
Cr.P.C. were ever served upon him and all the witnesses have
deposed falsely. Accused chose to lead defence evidence and
examined one witness in his defence.
2024.07.04
18:08:02
+0530
of process u/s 82 CrPC had been pasted outside the house
of accused as well as the main location of the locality of the
accused by Ct. Gulshan 4562/ND on 28.06.2007. Besides
Hue & Cry notice/process had been got published in the
leading newspaper but accused Surender Sood remained on
absconding deliberately. Process u/s 83 CrPC may please
be issued".